Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The use of computer-assisted orthopedic surgery for total knee replacement in daily practice: a survey among ESSKA/SGO-SSO members

  • Knee
  • Published:
Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy Aims and scope

Abstract

Computer-assisted orthopedic surgery (CAOS) for total knee arthroplasty is an emerging surgical tool, yet little is known about how it is being used in everyday orthopedic centers. We sought to better understand physicians’ current practices and beliefs on this topic through performing a Web-based survey. Between December 2006 and January 2007, a 24-question survey was emailed to 3,330 members of the European Society of Sports Traumatology Knee Surgery and Arthroscopy (ESSKA) and the Swiss Orthopedic Society (SGO-SSO), with 389 (11.7%) agreeing to participate. Of this group, 202 (51.9%) reported that their center was equipped with a navigation system, which was an image-free based system for most (83.2%) and was primarily used for total knee arthroplasty (61.4%). In terms of the proportion of use, 50.5% of respondents used their navigation system in less than 25% of cases, 16.3% in 25–50% of cases, 7.4% in 51–75% of cases, and 25.7% in more than 75% of cases. The potential for improving the alignment of prosthesis was the most strongly cited reason for using a navigation system, while the potential for increasing operation times and the risk of infections were the most strongly cited reasons for not using a navigation system. Approximately half of respondents surveyed believed navigation systems were a real innovation contributing to the improvement of total knee implantation. However, heavy usage of computer-assisted navigation (≥51% of cases) was observed in only 33.1% of respondents, with only a quarter using it at rates that could be considered frequent (>75% of cases). Forty-eight percent of respondents said they will use a navigation system in more cases and 39.1% that their usage will stay the same. These findings indicate that CAOS is being used only moderately in current practices, though respondents generally had a positive opinion of its potential benefits. Physicians may be awaiting more data before adopting the use of these systems, though survey responses also suggest a projected increase in their use in the coming years.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Kahler DM (2004) Image guidance: fluoroscopic navigation. Clin Orthop Relat Res 421:70–76

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Davies BL, Rodriguez y Baena FM, Barrett AR, Gomes MP, Harris SJ, Jakopec M, Cobb JP (2007) Robotic control in knee joint replacement surgery. Proc Inst Mech Eng [H] 221:71–80

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Bauwens K, Matthes G, Wich M, Gebhard F, Hanson B, Ekkernkamp A, Stengel D (2007) Navigated total knee replacement. A meta-analysis. J Bone Joint Surg Am 89:261–269

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Callaghan JJ, Liu SS, Warth LC (2006) Computer-assisted surgery: a wine before its time: in the affirmative. J Arthroplasty 21(4 Suppl 1):27–28

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Macule-Beneyto F, Hernandez-Vaquero D, Segur-Vilalta JM, Colomina-Rodriguez R, Hinarejos-Gomez P, Garcia-Forcada I, Seral Garcia B (2006) Navigation in total knee arthroplasty. A multicenter study. Int Orthop 30:536–540

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Sharkey PF, Hozack WJ, Rothman RH, Shastri S, Jacoby SM (2002) Insall Award paper. Why are total knee arthroplasties failing today? Clin Orthop Relat Res 404:7–13

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Ritter MA, Faris PM, Keating EM, Meding JB (1994) Postoperative alignment of total knee replacement. Its effect on survival. Clin Orthop Relat Res 299:153–156

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Dong H, Buxton M (2006) Early assessment of the likely cost-effectiveness of a new technology: a Markov model with probabilistic sensitivity analysis of computer-assisted total knee replacement. Int J Technol Assess Health Care 22:191–202

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Stulberg SD (2003) How accurate is current TKR instrumentation? Clin Orthop Relat Res 415:177–184

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Bathis H, Perlick L, Tingart M, Lüring C, Zurakowski D, Grifka J (2004) Alignment in total knee arthroplasty. A comparison of computerassisted surgery with the conventional technique. J Bone Joint Surg Br 86:682–687

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Haaker RG, Stockheim M, Kamp M, Proff G, Breitenfelder J, Ottersbach A (2005) Computer-assisted navigation increases precision of component placement in total knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res 433:152–159

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Victor J, Hoste D (2004) Image-based computer-assisted total knee arthroplasty leads to lower variability in coronal alignment. Clin Orthop Relat Res 428:131–139

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Picard F, Deakin AH, Clarke JV, Dillon JM, Gregori A (2007) Using navigation intraoperative measurements narrows range of outcomes in TKA. Clin Orthop Relat Res 463:50–57, (Epub ahead of print)

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Cobb J, Henckel J, Gomes P, Harris S, Jakopec M, Rodriguez F, Barrett A, Davies B (2006) Hands-on robotic unicompartmental knee replacement: a prospective, randomised controlled study of the acrobot system. J Bone Joint Surg Br 88:188–197

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Chauhan SK, Scott RG, Breidahl W, Beaver RJ (2004) Computer-assisted knee arthroplasty versus a conventional jig-based technique. A randomised, prospective trial. J Bone Joint Surg Br 86:372–377

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Daubresse F, Vajeu C, Loquet J (2005) Total knee arthroplasty with conventional or navigated technique: comparison of the learning curves in a community hospital. Acta Orthop Belg 71:710–713

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. European Society for Opinion and Marketing Research. ESOMAR world research codes and guidelines: Conducting market and opinion research using the internet. Available at: http://www.esomar.org/uploads/pdf/ESOMAR_Codes&Guideline-Conducting_research_using_Internet.pdf. Accessed on July 21, 2007

  18. Siston RA, Giori NJ, Goodman SB, Delp SL (2007) Surgical navigation for total knee arthroplasty: a perspective. J Biomech 40:728–735

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Kalairajah Y, Simpson D, Cossey AJ, Verrall GM, Spriggins AJ (2005) Blood loss after total knee replacement: effects of computer-assisted surgery. J Bone Joint Surg Br 87:1480–1482

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Kalairajah Y, Cossey AJ, Verrall GM, Ludbrook G, Spriggins AJ (2006) Are systemic emboli reduced in computer-assisted knee surgery? A prospective, randomised, clinical trial. J Bone Joint Surg Br 88:198–202

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Perlick L, Bathis H, Perlick C, Luring C, Tingart M, Grifka J (2005) Revision total knee arthroplasty: a comparison of postoperative leg alignment after computer-assisted implantation versus the conventional technique. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 13:167–173

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

An unconditional grant was received by Plus Orthopedics AG, Rotkreuz, Switzerland. The authors thank Peter Fennema (Rüschlikon, Switzerland), Louis Smets (Ismar Healthcare; Lier, Belgium), and John Watson (New York, USA) for their input. The offices of ESSKA and SGO-SSO assisted us in contacting their respective members.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department Orthopaedic Surgery and Traumatology, Kantonsspital, 4101, Bruderholz, Basel, Switzerland

    N. Friederich

  2. Department Orthopaedic Surgery, University Hospital Ghent, 9000, Ghent, Belgium

    R. Verdonk

Authors
  1. N. Friederich
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. R. Verdonk
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to N. Friederich.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Friederich, N., Verdonk, R. The use of computer-assisted orthopedic surgery for total knee replacement in daily practice: a survey among ESSKA/SGO-SSO members. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthr 16, 536–543 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00167-008-0518-x

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00167-008-0518-x

Keywords

Search

Navigation